Agenda item

The Assistant Director for Planning:

1. advised members of the reasons why a temporary tree preservation order made by the Assistant Director for Planning under delegated powers should be confirmed at the following site:

2. provided details of the individual tree to be covered by the order and the contribution it made to the area

3. reported that the initial 6 months of protection would come to an end for the Tree Preservation Order on 10 November 2021

4. confirmed that the reason for making a Tree Preservation Order on this site was at the request of the Arboricultural Officer, who was made aware of an intention to remove this tree and carried out a site visit to assess the tree for a Tree Preservation Order on this basis

5. added that the Arboricultural identified the tree to be suitable for protection under a Tree Preservation Order; it had a high amenity value, and its removal would have a significant effect on the aesthetic appearance of the area

6. advised that following an extended 51-day period of consultation, there had been an objection received to the order from the occupants of 53 Meadowlake Crescent, as detailed within the officer’s report citing concerns over:

7. added that an objection had also been received from the occupants of 51 Meadowlake Crescent, where the tree was located, having raised concerns that the tree was extremely large, close to the bungalow, with some low hanging branches and potential for damage should they fall

8. reported that following the review of the objections by the Arboricultural Officer it was felt that the concerns raised could be dealt with by remedial works to the tree; that most of the points raised were part of the natural lifecycle of a tree and that the large size of the tree and the amenity value that it added to the local area were the primary incentives to placing this Tree Preservation Order, which would ensure both the trees retention and correct management in the future

9. advised that confirmation of the tree preservation order here would ensure that the tree could not be removed or worked on without the express permission of the council which would be considered detrimental to visual amenity and as such the protection of the tree would contribute to one of the Councils priorities of enhancing our remarkable place.

Members commented/questioned the Arboricultural Officer as follows:

·         Question: Was it possible to take action to address the issues identified within the consultation letters submitted?

·         Response: The primary objective was for the tree to be protected and works would be undertaken to mitigate the issues highlighted.

·         Comment: This was a magnificent tree with an enormous girth. The Councillor in question had visited the site and noted that the tree was in good shape. Previous work had been undergone to the tree and although the specimen needed to be kept in check it should be preserved.

·         Response: Yes, work had been completed on the tree before. The canopy was asymmetrical, and work would be scheduled to keep it in shape.

RESOLVED that Tree Preservation Order No 163 be confirmed without modification and that delegated authority be granted to the Assistant Director of Planning to carry out the requisite procedures for confirmation.